basemetal:Yeah, you already knew corporate was going to get in on this. Too much money to be made to let someone from the lower ranks to make a go of it.

I don't care if corporate gets in on it, but this is farking ridiculous. I could start a pot farm for the price of a small plot of land. If I grew indoors, it would cost me a few hundred dollars in lighting and electriciy.

There's no way I could come up with a half a farking million dollars to start a grow op - and put it in escrow?

There's no farking way. This will spur lawsuits that I hope the state loses.

A company with $500K to start likely also has enough money for 2 things -First and foremost is a payoff for our local elected officials andSecond is the means to afford the overhead of a heavily regulated industry

My best guess is we're talking about big campaign contributions. When your political opponents whips out the "he's pro-weed" commercials with pictures of dead kids, the incumbent will be able to offset it with the money he gets from the weed fund.

Given this half million dollar escrow, additional license fees and the Feds not allowing normal business deductions, the $pecial interests keep trying to screw medical cannabis patients and slow down the process. Not until Cannabis is no longer Schedule 1, hemp is a legal (and profitable) industry, and finally cannabis is also legal will this kind of crap end!

I see a future where there may be decriminalization, but the War on Drugs will continue unabated, just shifted to an ATF game plan of repression andprotection of the profiteers who paid for it. You can make your own beer, but the good stuff, is NOT FOR YOU!FTA: ""People need to start thinking about this like Big Tobacco, and realize that there's a very powerful industry here, who are going to do what they need to do to protect those interests,"

Rogue Surf:Given this half million dollar escrow, additional license fees and the Feds not allowing normal business deductions, the $pecial interests keep trying to screw medical cannabis patients and slow down the process. Not until Cannabis is no longer Schedule 1, hemp is a legal (and profitable) industry, and finally cannabis is also legal will this kind of crap end!

A company with $500K to start likely also has enough money for 2 things -First and foremost is a payoff for our local elected officials andSecond is the means to afford the overhead of a heavily regulated industry

My best guess is we're talking about big campaign contributions. When your political opponents whips out the "he's pro-weed" commercials with pictures of dead kids, the incumbent will be able to offset it with the money he gets from the weed fund.

Until the money is right for the 1%, you will not get "legal" weed in prime time.

Happy Hours:basemetal: Yeah, you already knew corporate was going to get in on this. Too much money to be made to let someone from the lower ranks to make a go of it.

I don't care if corporate gets in on it, but this is farking ridiculous. I could start a pot farm for the price of a small plot of land. If I grew indoors, it would cost me a few hundred dollars in lighting and electriciy.

There's no way I could come up with a half a farking million dollars to start a grow op - and put it in escrow?

There's no farking way. This will spur lawsuits that I hope the state loses.

Seriously, Massachusetts, WTF is wrong with you?

What chew mean by "wrong", Willis?Looks "just right" to some powerbroker.

snocone:I see a future where there may be decriminalization, but the War on Drugs will continue unabated, just shifted to an ATF game plan of repression andprotection of the profiteers who paid for it. You can make your own beer, but the good stuff, is NOT FOR YOU!FTA: ""People need to start thinking about this like Big Tobacco, and realize that there's a very powerful industry here, who are going to do what they need to do to protect those interests,"

Meet the New Boss, same same as the Old Boss.

It is decriminalized in Massachusetts, up to one ounce, but it's still against the law, save for prescriptions. Make it completely legal and that's when you're buying a pack of unfiltered Camel weed, taxed to the bone. For now, it'll be more like buying ritalin. You can get it from a doctor, but most likely the kid sitting next to you can hook you up.

There is of course the possibility that the state knows these people, who will be operating an illegal business, will be ineligible for bank loans and will have much much higher overhead issues. Given the amount of small grow-ops and dispensaries that popped up in legalize states and then got economically ass-hammered by the fact that their business is still illegal, perhaps this is just a version of "dispenser beware."

Given Mass. is the site of the largest ever judgment in a single death case against a tobacco manufacturer, it may not be that the state is in big tobacco's pocket . . . .

snocone:FTA: ""People need to start thinking about this like Big Tobacco, and realize that there's a very powerful industry here, who are going to do what they need to do to protect those interests,"

You might note that you quoted a single, clearly biased source. A source who is an idiot chicken-little moron who insists the law allows children to get cards without parental approval and that "pain" isn't a good enough reason to medicate, and that every bit of anti-pot propaganda ever written is farking gospel.

A company with $500K to start likely also has enough money for 2 things -First and foremost is a payoff for our local elected officials andSecond is the means to afford the overhead of a heavily regulated industry

My best guess is we're talking about big campaign contributions. When your political opponents whips out the "he's pro-weed" commercials with pictures of dead kids, the incumbent will be able to offset it with the money he gets from the weed fund.

Until the money is right for the 1%, you will not get "legal" weed in prime time.

I think we're kind of on the same page. I can't see companies other than Marlboro, Winston, Newport, Camel, etc.. really getting into this business. They already 100% have the means to do this, including all of the regulatory and legal armies. The lone exception is needing to convert some of their tobacco suppliers to a different crop. In less than one year they could fill every corner convenience store.

Teiritzamna:There is of course the possibility that the state knows these people, who will be operating an illegal business, will be ineligible for bank loans and will have much much higher overhead issues. Given the amount of small grow-ops and dispensaries that popped up in legalize states and then got economically ass-hammered by the fact that their business is still illegal, perhaps this is just a version of "dispenser beware."

I don't buy it. MOST small businesses fail. Pretending they want to make sure it doesn't happen to pot shops? Cripes, even I can't get stoned enough to believe that.

GilRuiz1:Who didn't see this coming? Did the stoners imagine corporations would let mom-n-pop operations own the next big legal vice?

Is corporate moving in on microbreweries? Last time I tried to send a bottle of wine from a boutique winery across state lines, it proved to be damn near impossible. I finally ended up putting it in a box used to ship a cylinder of chlorine gas--that I was allowed to ship.

I'm waiting to see how the CO. regs work out (6 plants for personal use).

Any yahoo with half-a-brain and and cheap fluoro setup (three 48" shop fixtures and 6 GE Sunlight F40's), with excellent seed stock, can keep a garden going indoors, for cheap, forever. Sure, the horticultural purists and those who wanna shoot weed porn will cluck their tongues at the lack of perfect foliage and drooping colas. However, with an excellent Sativa cultivar, one can simply keep the lights riding the tops of the plants and start to snipping away on the third set of plates; nuke the greenery in the microwave - two hits from vaporizer not sufficient? Get a better cultivar (old Santa Marta/Thai will do).

Couple more State's voters push through CO style reform and the jig is up. The difference between ditch weed and `bottled in bond' is choice of seed (primarily). State sanctioned, overpriced `medicine'? Niche market.

basemetal:Yeah, you already knew corporate was going to get in on this. Too much money to be made to let someone from the lower ranks to make a go of it.

I know a few stoners with delusions of becoming millionaires under legalized marijuana regimes. I often ask them how many millionaire tobacco farmers they know. Of course anything with the potential to generate this much cash is going to be dominated by big companies. I wonder how much money the Catholic Church and Mormon Church are already investing in it.

This is pretty much exactly the same way legal liquor producers are handled if I'm not mistaken. You've got to pony up an amount well beyond what your average start-up or individual would ever be able to come up with before you can even get in the game.

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer:Like most "business killing regulations," the only reason they are business-killing is to keep competition from the little guys out.

"Competition" and "free market" don't mean what the Congresscritters and their corporate donors say they do. This is the same kind of crap that the big telcos pulled to kill municipal internet providers.

Anything other than their state and city-sanctioned monopolies are unfair trade.

Follow the money. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a tobacco company that lobbied for the steep cost of entry to keep out competition.

Sybarite:The state proposed rules - which prohibit convicted drug dealers from owning or working at a state-licensed dispensary

Well there go most of your qualified applicants.

Pretty much. The girl critter's brother got popped a few years ago, and while I don't smoke weed, I have to say, the man is an artist. Just an amazing green thumb, and the care and knowledge that he has would be invaluable to any company that wanted to get into commercial growing. The varieties that he has worked on are gorgeous. This is really the fear that I have with the current efforts to decriminalize, is that it will push out competition, and it will take years for an industry to really develop. Not just for those who want to use the drug, but for other commercial applications.

Then again, Mass loves to squeeze out competition, in favor of those who have deep pockets to line legislators and regulators...

As long as it's still legal to grow your own in MA, I don't think Big Weed can do too much harm.I have no idea what their plant limit is, but in every other State, the limit is "way more than most people need".And the mere existence of other legal sources gives plenty of cover for one private individual to acquire pot from another.

I look forward to Corporate Weed Advertising. Stuff like golden tanned surfers on a cliff overlooking the ocean and the big text "Come Up to Mendocino Country".

Or perhaps a split-page ad where on the left you see a grainy color photo, all faded like you pulled it out of a scrap-book from the 70's, depicting some Laurie Partridge looking groovy hippie babe in handcuffs with cops and some protest signs, then in the right panel a modern groovy hippie babe with blond dreadlocks and a nose ring sitting in a park with her drum circle and everyone's got HUGE Bob Marley joints. "You've come a Long Way, Dude."

And instead of all the Virginia and Carolina place-names for the brands, it's all Northern California and Mexico and What Not.

Teiritzamna:Given Mass. is the site of the largest ever judgment in a single death case against a tobacco manufacturer, it may not be that the state is in big tobacco's pocket . . . .

The tobacco companies being against marijuana is one of the biggest myths anyway (likewise with pharmaceuticals, most likely).

hink about this logically (not you, specifically, but anyone reading):

1) Tobacco use is falling at an increasing rate thanks to public perception against it2) The cigarette companies scrambled to register trademarks and have already planned for a possible switch in the 1970s. They're not against it - they're still looking for a suitable replacement they can market, and marijuana fits the bill.

What's keeping marijuana illegal , in reality, is probably momentum. It's been illegal for the entire lives of most of the congressmen, and like anything it's just going to take time to make changes in a political environment where everyone is more interested in CYA instead of actually taking brave steps to get anything accomplished (virtually impossible with the current level of party politics too).

Amazing it takes pot to show you the majority of regulation is put in by big business to stop competition.

How many in this thread have lambasted the gop for saying regulatuons deny competition.

Look at the number of regulations at the federal level. It is a joke. Yet you keep voting for politicians who want even more regulations, for the companies they support.

Actually, MOST of the regulation that we see today is to keep codes and competition out, and for exempting those already in business from being held to the same standards. It isn't a "liberal" or "conservative" push, it is a push by those who really don't like a free market economy, and would rather the assisted market that we have today. What many call "business killing regulation" is regulation that would hold everyone to the same standards and allow for freer competition.

What we need is not "more" or "less" regulation, but sane standards that will allow a free market to prevail--and by free market I mean a fee and even field to compete fairly. We don't have that now, and we are getting less free all the time, as lobbyists work tirelessly to keep competition from the doorsteps of those already in, and to keep up barriers from allowing new players, or even new technologies and methods to be applied, and to preserve subsidies that have long gone over their sell by date. It isn't a matter of more or less regulation, but sane regulation that will promote healthy competition so that the best products and the best practices will flourish.

hubiestubert:MyRandomName: I thought you liberals were for business regulations...

Amazing it takes pot to show you the majority of regulation is put in by big business to stop competition.

How many in this thread have lambasted the gop for saying regulatuons deny competition.

Look at the number of regulations at the federal level. It is a joke. Yet you keep voting for politicians who want even more regulations, for the companies they support.

Actually, MOST of the regulation that we see today is to keep codes and competition out, and for exempting those already in business from being held to the same standards. It isn't a "liberal" or "conservative" push, it is a push by those who really don't like a free market economy, and would rather the assisted market that we have today. What many call "business killing regulation" is regulation that would hold everyone to the same standards and allow for freer competition.

What we need is not "more" or "less" regulation, but sane standards that will allow a free market to prevail--and by free market I mean a fee and even field to compete fairly. We don't have that now, and we are getting less free all the time, as lobbyists work tirelessly to keep competition from the doorsteps of those already in, and to keep up barriers from allowing new players, or even new technologies and methods to be applied, and to preserve subsidies that have long gone over their sell by date. It isn't a matter of more or less regulation, but sane regulation that will promote healthy competition so that the best products and the best practices will flourish.

Somaticasual:Teiritzamna: Given Mass. is the site of the largest ever judgment in a single death case against a tobacco manufacturer, it may not be that the state is in big tobacco's pocket . . . .

The tobacco companies being against marijuana is one of the biggest myths anyway (likewise with pharmaceuticals, most likely).

hink about this logically (not you, specifically, but anyone reading):

1) Tobacco use is falling at an increasing rate thanks to public perception against it2) The cigarette companies scrambled to register trademarks and have already planned for a possible switch in the 1970s. They're not against it - they're still looking for a suitable replacement they can market, and marijuana fits the bill.

What's keeping marijuana illegal , in reality, is probably momentum. It's been illegal for the entire lives of most of the congressmen, and like anything it's just going to take time to make changes in a political environment where everyone is more interested in CYA instead of actually taking brave steps to get anything accomplished (virtually impossible with the current level of party politics too).

When legalization hits NC, we're going to be in for one HELL of a ride.There's a reason all those tobacco ads had Carolina and Virginia names, that's where Phillip Farking Morris is. Once the manufacturing facility is cleared for pot they will be dropping enough shag weed on the market bought from mountain sellers to burn a joint the size of the Sears tower.